From: Jan M. STANKOVSKY (jan.stankovsky@univie.ac.at)
Date: Thu Sep 07 2006 - 03:57:58 EDT
Hello!
So I went out and bought me a SAN storage (SATA/FC) system. For now its
connected to a Sun T2000 with Sol 10 6/06. Unfortunatly I came across
zfs, which sounds promising. Beeing a good administrator I did some
performance testing by my self after reading several blogs and the zfs
mailing list archives how fast zfs is.
But my figues are different and now I'm really unsecure what I should use.
Here are my measurements:
I used filebench with varmail (fileserver is not working correctly)
single disk with ufs
413014 ops 6737.2 ops/s, (1036/1037 r/w) 42.8mb/s, 782us cpu/op
3.3ms latency
single disk with zfs
207180 ops 3430.4 ops/s, (528/528 r/w) 16.6mb/s, 571us cpu/op,
14.3ms latency
zfs with raidz 4 disks
132514 ops 2193.7 ops/s, (337/338 r/w) 10.7mb/s, 741us cpu/op,
22.8ms latency
SAME with atime=off !!!!!
941737 ops 15579.6 ops/s, (2397/2397 r/w) 75.0mb/s, 223us cpu/op,
0.2ms latency
HW Raid 6 ufs
417548 ops 6916.9 ops/s, (1064/1064 r/w) 43.0mb/s, 787us cpu/op,
3.2ms latency
The storage will be used for home dirs and for imap mail storage mainly.
What makes me wonder is the boost without atime. But for a mail storage
it is not a good choice. So for a productive server it is not an option.
Do you have any comments? Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I wonder if
my SAN is a little bit slow.....
-jan
_______________________________________________
sunmanagers mailing list
sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org
http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 23:40:45 EDT